Printable View
[QUOTE=ProfessorMurder]You can't subtract threes taken from total field goals on your own?[/QUOTE]
why should we have to do that, then recalculate the percentage, every time we want to compare shooting stats? It makes more sense to just have 2 pointers, 3 pointers and fts as separate percentages.
They are listed separately at basketball reference as they should be.
TS% doesn't combine percentages, it just looks at how many points were scored in relation to how many that would've been scored if all possessions were used correctly.
The player that has the higher TS% made better use of his possessions AKA was more efficient. It's not hard. This doesn't neccessarily mean he's the better scorer because there are other factors that have to be considered such as volume, defensive attention, etc. But just looking at scoring efficiency alone, TS% is the best stat to use.
[QUOTE=Optimus Prime]Advanced stats like TS, PER, WS, etc. were only created in order to prop up manufactured "legends" like LeBron and tear down real legends like MJ, Kobe, etc.
They are to be dismissed, ridiculed then ignored by anyone who knows and understands basketball. The same should be done to anyone who uses advanced stats in their arguments.
:kobe:[/QUOTE]
Advanced stats actually prop up MJ just fine. However, they make Kobe look like the overrated chucker that he is. :lol
OP :bowdown:
Preach my brotha!! Preach!!
Yikes...
I just read this entire thread, and it's very telling that the 'old school' side used superior logic and common sense and were able to explain their rationale more clearly due to superior writing skills.
As an econ guy in school and ex-published economist, there was a time when I was fascinated by every number and statistic in the world. As I've aged into my late twenties and my basketball knowledge has grown, I find myself going back to FGM/FGA, etc. I agree with the poster who said that advanced team stats are most useful in a team setting.
[QUOTE=Young X]
The player that has the higher TS% made better use of his possessions AKA was more efficient.
[/QUOTE]
this isn't true.
let me explain real quick: shooting 33% on a three-pointer is equal to shooting 50% on a two-pointer.
so TS% merely accounts for this fact and accordingly weights 3-pointers a little heavier, while also incorporating FT's into the final TS percentage.
so TS% is a player's percentage on ALL the shots they take (3-pointers, 2-pointers and FT's).
players that shoot a material volume of 3-pointers, and shoot them WELL enough (33% or higher compared to a 50% two-point shot), will have higher TS% than a player that didn't attempt many 3-pointers, or had a poor percentage - so TS percentages are definitely propped up higher in today's era due to the emphasis on 3-point shooting.
but TS% doesn't consider how LONG a player held the ball, or the other factors going into a possession, so it certainly doesn't measure who is "using" possessions the best.
Fu*king nerds:facepalm
[QUOTE=3ball]this isn't true.
let me explain real quick: shooting 33% on a three-pointer is equal to shooting 50% on a two-pointer.
so TS% merely accounts for this fact and accordingly weights 3-pointers a little heavier, while also incorporating FT's into the final TS percentage.
so TS% is a player's percentage on ALL the shots they take (3-pointers, 2-pointers and FT's).
players that shoot a material volume of 3-pointers, and shoot them WELL enough (33% or higher compared to a 50% two-point shot), will have higher TS% than a player that didn't attempt many 3-pointers, or had a poor percentage - so TS percentages are definitely slanted higher in today's era due to the emphasis on 3-point shooting.
but TS% doesn't consider how LONG a player held the ball, or the other factors going into a possession, so it certainly doesn't measure who is "using" possessions the best.[/QUOTE]
Huh? No shooting percentage stat considers how long a player held the ball before shooting.
There is a reason why today's era has more emphasis on 3s. Because most guys shoot under 50% from 10 to 22 feet. Other than shots at the rim the 3 point shot is typically the most efficient shot, assuming the player is a competent 3 point shooter.
Looking at 2 point jumpers from 10-22 feet from last season Dirk and Curry, two of the leagues elite shooters, managed to shoot 50% from that range. Most guys are closer to 40%.
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/plus/shot_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=single&year_id=2014&is_playoffs=N&team_id=&opp_id=&game_num_min=0&game_num_max=99&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&shot_pts=&is_make=&shot_type=&shot_distance_min=10&shot_distance_max=22&q1=Y&q2=Y&q3=Y&q4=Y&q5=Y&time_remain_minutes=12&time_remain_seconds=0&time_remain_comp=le&margin_min=&margin_max=&c1stat=&c1comp=ge&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=ge&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=ge&c3val=&order_by=fg[/url]
Ideally the best shots are at the rim but those shots are also the hardest to get.
FG% should be retired. You always see FG% alongside 3P%. They should just show 2P% and 3P%
[QUOTE=ralph_i_el]FG% means nothing.
If you're against TS% you're a ****ing luddite[/QUOTE]
Man I love this forum its the daily hilaria
[QUOTE=coin24]Fu*king nerds:facepalm[/QUOTE]
I know man lol where's Shaq.
He'd listen to it like 30 seconds, just grab a ball in one hand make a fist and smash it flat then ram it down their throat whilst floating off on that genie cloud and displaying a big ol' Kazaam grin
[QUOTE=Young X]TS% doesn't combine percentages, it just looks at how many points were scored in relation to how many that would've been scored if all possessions were used correctly.
The player that has the higher TS% made better use of his possessions AKA was more efficient. It's not hard. This doesn't neccessarily mean he's the better scorer because there are other factors that have to be considered such as volume, defensive attention, etc. But just looking at scoring efficiency alone, TS% is the best stat to use.[/QUOTE]
This x10.
I don't know why people view this stuff in such a black and white way, as if one stat HAS to be flawless, or else it's utterly meaningless. All these stats, whether raw stats or advanced metrics, have to be used in conjunction with team context (style of play, player roles, etc.) and the eye test. The people who talk shit about TS% are the people who have made some contrived connection between the stat and actual skill level, when it clearly has nothing to do with that. All it does is give you the closest thing to an accurate picture of overall scoring efficiency. Which again, is actually pretty damn valuable if you know how to properly apply it in basketball analysis.
[QUOTE=brooks_thompson]I just read this entire thread, and it's very telling that the 'old school' side used superior logic and common sense and were able to explain their rationale more clearly due to superior writing skills.
As an econ guy in school and ex-published economist, there was a time when I was fascinated by every number and statistic in the world. As I've aged into my late twenties and my basketball knowledge has grown, I find myself going back to FGM/FGA, etc. I agree with the poster who said that advanced team stats are most useful in a team setting.[/QUOTE]
Not to derail the train, but this is from a real old thread where we were talking about Wilt and the 60s - in regards to PER rather than TS - but it still goes to your point.....
Looky here at a old timer point of view.
"Back in the olden days," there was just 3 basic stats; ppg, rpg, and apg. Blocks & steals weren't recognized as a statistic. I'm talking about a [B][I]long[/I][/B] time ago.
PER and all those kinds of great advanced stats are skewed by that fact, so it's valid to compare players BEFORE 1974, or AFTER 1974, but to cross that line is not valid. Really 1979-80 season, when the 3 pointer came to the NBA is another line for comparing guys PER.
I saw Chamberlain block 17 shots against Bob Lanier's Pistons when he was a old-@$$ Laker... saw him block KAJ skyhooks too. But if you look in the books, Wilt never blocked a single shot. All his blocks count for 0. In reality, Chamberlain's PER is jackshite low compared to what it really was.
He had real quick hands too, & got lots of steals. Not Jerry West Walt Frazier Bernard King Joe Dumars Mike hands, but he did get a ton of em. On PER rating that also counts for bumpkus.
Refs from that day have gone on record saying Wilt & Russell undoubtedly had triple doubles seasons if blocks had counted back then.
Well, it used to be we'd just add up the 3 key stats & you had a pretty fair figure for what a guy was doing on the court. Everybody did it. That old method is totally abandoned, possibly because ESPN can't add. But we can, so let's just look real quick.
Shaq 23.7 + 10.9 + 2.5 = 37.1
Dirk 23 + 8.4 + 2.7 = 34.1
KAJ 24.6 + 11.4 + 3.6 = 39.6
Magic 19.5 + 7.2 + 11.2 = 37.9
MJ 30.1 + 6.2 + 5.3 = 41.4
Russell 15.1 + 22.5 + 4.3 = 41.9
Rick Barry 23.2 + 6.5 + 5.1 = 34.8
Wilt 30.1 + 22.9 + 4.4 = 58.4
That's just insane.
*******************************
Me and some of the old guys still use that method, and it's still more accurate than all these advanced fiddleries that have since been devised to confuse.
Not that I disagree at all with the Mighty Ralph_i_el but I'm just sayin ... there's a lot of truth to that simple, infallible method that old Abe Saperstein showed to a bunch of hoops hippies a long long time ago
[QUOTE=La Frescobaldi]Not to derail the train, but this is from a real old thread where we were talking about Wilt and the 60s - in regards to PER rather than TS - but it still goes to your point.....
Looky here at a old timer point of view.
"Back in the olden days," there was just 3 basic stats; ppg, rpg, and apg. Blocks & steals weren't recognized as a statistic. I'm talking about a [B][I]long[/I][/B] time ago.
PER and all those kinds of great advanced stats are skewed by that fact, so it's valid to compare players BEFORE 1974, or AFTER 1974, but to cross that line is not valid. Really 1979-80 season, when the 3 pointer came to the NBA is another line for comparing guys PER.
I saw Chamberlain block 17 shots against Bob Lanier's Pistons when he was a old-@$$ Laker... saw him block KAJ skyhooks too. But if you look in the books, Wilt never blocked a single shot. All his blocks count for 0. In reality, Chamberlain's PER is jackshite low compared to what it really was.
He had real quick hands too, & got lots of steals. Not Jerry West Walt Frazier Bernard King Joe Dumars Mike hands, but he did get a ton of em. On PER rating that also counts for bumpkus.
Refs from that day have gone on record saying Wilt & Russell undoubtedly had triple doubles seasons if blocks had counted back then.
Well, it used to be we'd just add up the 3 key stats & you had a pretty fair figure for what a guy was doing on the court. Everybody did it. That old method is totally abandoned, possibly because ESPN can't add. But we can, so let's just look real quick.
Shaq 23.7 + 10.9 + 2.5 = 37.1
Dirk 23 + 8.4 + 2.7 = 34.1
KAJ 24.6 + 11.4 + 3.6 = 39.6
Magic 19.5 + 7.2 + 11.2 = 37.9
MJ 30.1 + 6.2 + 5.3 = 41.4
Russell 15.1 + 22.5 + 4.3 = 41.9
Rick Barry 23.2 + 6.5 + 5.1 = 34.8
Wilt 30.1 + 22.9 + 4.4 = 58.4
That's just insane.
*******************************
Me and some of the old guys still use that method, and it's still more accurate than all these advanced fiddleries that have since been devised to confuse.
Not that I disagree at all with the Mighty Ralph_i_el but I'm just sayin ... there's a lot of truth to that simple, infallible method that old Abe Saperstein showed to a bunch of hoops hippies a long long time ago[/QUOTE]
One of the many impressive facts about Wilt was that he was not only the best rebounder on the floor in the vast majority of his games (and even moreso in the post-season when he was unapproachable), but the man was likely blocking at LEAST 8 shots per game in his career. Why is that so impressive? Because the reality was/is, blocked shots tend to REDUCE rebounding numbers. And given the fact that Wilt not only blocked 8+ shots per game, but he likely went for another 8+ every game, as well. One can only speculate, of course, but he clearly LOST some of his potential rebounds every game, and I suspect it was perhaps around 4 per game, by being the greatest shot-blocker (and by a wide margin) of all-time.